Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by makeitstop

  1. but what if we go with earlier-style strafing where you can change direction instantaneously? In other words no strafe acceleration? Would you prefer acceleration? (good point by the way, I hadn't even thought of that.) edit thinking about it I guess that even if there were no strafe acceleration and you could change direction instantaneously- it could still be possible to have nonrandom projectile with the method you described above however you would only ever have to lead by roughly half a reticule at most for a system like that to work. Basically the mathematical factors would have to take into account how fast the other person could move after changing direction- forcing you to lead less each time if the variables are accounted for- but if their strafe-speed is anything at all like halo 2/ halo c.e. this would mean that you would only ever have to lead your shots by a tiny amount- keeping your reticule at least partly overlapping their body. however, this would lead to unrealistic shots. Since you would always have to keep at least part of your reticule overlapping them regardless of range this would lead to shooting dynamics where it appears physically as if the bullet is actually continually accelerating as it travels. In other words, as the opponent backs up in distance, the bullet speeds up to compensate so that the same amount of leading is necessary regardless of how far the opponent is. Even if the amount of leading necessary is increased- it [the amount of leading necessary] would still have to approach an asymptote. Namely- it [the leading] could still never exceed putting your reticule outside of the opponent's body. There would still have to be at least 1 pixel of overlap. So it would still have to theoretically have an accelerating bullet, although the accelerating bullet would accelerate with less quickness if this were the case (the amount of leading does increase with distance- but never exceeds putting your reticule on the edge of their hitbox). So we have two options when there is no strafe acceleration: 1. have an accelerating bullet (very unintuitive- although theoretically the amount of accelerating could be minimized on small maps to where it is never even noticed- by small I mean less than 500m in length) 2. or simply go hitscan and have a bullet that travels at infinite speed, i.e. hits instantaneously. (of course you could have the registration of the shot lag a little bit, but the point is that whether or not it hits is decided in an instant based on whether your aim was on the opponent or not.) It's harder to work out on paper, but I believe just based on a preliminary sketch of the factors involved that you would still have to have an accelerating bullet to use the system that you described when there IS strafe acceleration (and by definition deceleration as well). I could be wrong however- and it could be that the amount of accelerating the bullet would have to undergo could be perfectly counteracted by the amount of accelerating that the opponent would have to go through when changing direction coupled with the change in leading- as range is increased. This is a problem that is easier stated than solved- it is deceptively difficult. At least I believe it is just by looking at it. Possibly there's a simple solution? I'd have to put more time into it if I really feel like figuring it out. second edit: this is all of course assuming that you don't do something else unintuitive like increasing the hitbox of the opponent with range or (gasp) increasing aim assist with range.
  2. 'Aight we get it people. You splooge whenever cT makes a comment. I'm not saying that his comments aren't that good or anything, I'm just saying that I'd rather not see 2 or 3 people saying "praise you based cT" every single time the guy makes a comment longer than two paragraphs.
  3. thank you for understanding/agreeing with me about projectile having inherent randomness. However, I'm not sure this could be accomplished any way except for just going full hitscan- which really has no drawbacks other than possibly slightly lowering the skill it takes since you don't have to know about leading.
  4. yeah I really don't think you understood it at all. I'm not sure what good reiterating my main point will do so I won't even bother. And this wasn't an "essay" I just double spaced things.
  5. It's projectile nature was especially noticeable when playing snipers on sandtrap back when trying out custom game lobbies and such. I distinctly remember having to lead shots to shoot people on mongooses going around the outskirts of sandtrap.
  6. and reach was garbage- it decimated competitive halo. We should not be making games like reach. Also the first 3 games have always been arena shooters in that everyone spawns on the same exact footing differing only in spawn location so I'm not sure what you're trying to say there.
  7. yeah I agree. it doesn't make sense why they can't hold say, a grav hammer.
  8. as far as the next tournament is concerned nobody knows yet. It's all up in the air who will attend and who won't.
  9. Alright, I'll admit it. aPK hacked my comment and called you a penisface. I have no idea why he did it, but once again I apologize for the inconvenience that aPK brought upon you with his lewd and malicious hack.
  10. do not like. This would still make a halo a class shooter- which it is not and should never be.
  11. Just would like to say that simplex *is not* asymmetrical. It is definitely symmetrical in relation to where players spawn. Same with haven. (well kinda- there are some slight differences that bug me between red and blue side) I mean, by that logic any map that is not doubly symmetrical is asymmetrical. I guess this means that Narrows, midship, and the pit are all asymmetrical too.
  12. remember when roy said he'd play and everyone got hyped and then he went to like 1 or 2 tournaments.
  13. no im not going to chill. I don't like the fucking way you're staring at me through your profile pic.
  14. They would not improve right away. Ogre 2 still has a lot of ground to make up- but of course he could do it if he was really dedicated. It's halo 4 though- so I'm not sure how dedicated he would be. I think he just wants an event win in halo 4.
  15. Essentially my exact thoughts as well. Also sprint *is* bad for BTB, just less so. lol seriously? It was like half a page long, just read the whole thing.
  16. you should rewatch it. It's worth the rewatch. (p.s. you should unblock me now. I did not mean to call you a penisface- that was an accident and I apologize for the unfortunate, yet out-of-my-control occurrence.)
  17. I would not mind halo 3 equipment on maps- as long as their aren't so many that it pollutes the maps. There should just be one or two max- and they should be replaced with the AAs, since the AAs are actually useful. I mean, bubble shield and regen were useful, but those promote camping/static gameplay. Would rather see on map aas like jetpack/thruster/possibly prom vision (as a central pickup for both teams to fight over of course.) since those aas promote movement.
  18. There is an important difference here- when you are in a long range enounter with a projectile weapon, you essentially have to flip a coin at times as to where you should aim. IF they happen to the strafe in the direction that you lead- congrats. IF they happen to strafe in the other direction- oh well. With projectile based aiming sometimes a slightly worse player will get slightly luckier in guessing where you go and "win" the battle- even if that only means that they forced you to back down. Obviously you have to strafe and strafing is "a good play and actually strafing like an intelligent being." You don't need to explain to me the benefits of strafing- that is unrelated. If I had the option to let my opponents shots be more accurate, or to increase the randomness of their shots- obviously I would choose to increase the randomness of their shots. Same thing with strafing- obviously I'm going to strafe projectile or no projectile. That does not have any bearing on which is a better system though. With projectile aiming you have a small slit that you need to aim into in order to hit your target- but you often have to take a guess where that slit is at longer ranges- and hope that you got lucky. With hitscan (and a lower aim assist) you still have a small slit that you need to aim into- it's just that there is no guesswork involved. And you still have to strafe regardless of whether or not there is hitscan, so an argument of which makes strafing "more important" is irrelevant. You'll still be strafing either way- it's just that with hitscan the benefits are slightly lessened since your opponent no longer has to guess which way you'll strafe/stutter/stop/jump/crouch with their next stop. Now I do know that the time between when you pull the trigger and when the bullets hit is a very small window- and you don't have to lead by too much. The guesswork involved is really only slight- like half an inch on my screen. But that's guesswork nontheless. In other words- I understand that this is not an issue of "I aimed left, but unfortunately he went right" but rather "I aimed left a full inch, but unfortunately he began to stutter and I should have only aimed left 3 quarters of an inch." I recognize that the guesswork is slight- but once again it's still there. Essentially here are the pros and cons: Projectile + slightly more skill involved (since you have to know about leading shots) + harder to aim at range - only harder to aim at range due to guesswork involved, and a "rock/paper/scissors" mechanic where both players are in control of their movement, but it still leads to a randomness inducing encounter - garbage online Hitscan +no guesswork involved whatsoever +better hit tracking online - takes slightly less skill than having to lead. (you still have to aim just as good, but now you don't have to worry about leading) Halo ce worked because A: killtimes were quicker and B:the whole rest of the game was so much better. C: I prefer the projectile nature of the pistol over the projectile nature coupled with the super spread of the BR (although the pistol did have some spread). With the pistol it is arguable that the skill added overshadows the guesswork involved- so I'm not saying that projectile *can't be done*, but I would soooo much rather have a halo 4 BR with descope than a halo 3 BR.
  19. I agree with sloppy bottom. It's not my fault the question is just worded as "which would you prefer?". If you wanted me to ignore the armor ability nature of sprint in reach and the non-armor ability nature in halo 4 than you should have explicitly said that.
  20. You mean a 2nd time. Saucy posted specifics in that thread that you locked. I know that. He was the only one that I saw however, and I would like to see some specifics from coachmayne's perspective. Other's have said that 343 "gets it", but without any specifics. I honestly do not feel that that is too much to ask for. The only reason why I bothered to read the whole OP was because I was looking for info that he got from talking with 343 about their opinions on certain aspects. Unfortunately there were none. Just a "they get it". Am I really asking for more than I should?
  21. Oh I know you did. I was just asking for coachmayne to share what he learned as well.
  22. Maybe he was saying that it takes 2 body shots and one head shot to kill someone in ce?
  23. i just would like a little bit of details and specifics. Something a little, tiny bit more than "they get it. Trust me". Is that so hard to ask for?
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy.